Reduction Of Globalization And Poverty In Developing Countries

Globalization reduces poverty and brings up the life expectancy. According to the World Bank, in 1994 India's poverty headcount ratio was 45.3% and in 2012 it has gotten two times better. Another improvement is Ethiopia. the World Bank headcount poverty was 45.5% in 1995 a study in 2011 shows it has gone down 29.6%. Globalization has helped other countries build up their economy because once they have a factory that originated from a US company they can give jobs to people in the different country.

That this was also the decade in which globalization came into full swing is more than a minor inconvenience for its advocates” (Rodrick). If globalization is supposed to present an advantage to developing countries, why have there been so many setbacks? Indeed, both sides will have its winners and losers regardless of which side of the development coin they live on, but for the most part globalization has lifted millions out of poverty, improved the standard of living, and increased life expectancy rates all while keeping developed nations relatively competitive to their developing counterparts. Globalization’s value is that it seeks to create an economic equilibrium in the world, where parties are free from barriers and can benefit from one another through a more efficient allocation of resources. This allows all participating nations to contribute to an integrated economy and where all nations willing to embrace globalization have the potential to benefit. Regardless, the path to successful integration to the global economy has not always been easy. There is contention towards globalization as some argue that it is detrimental to developed nations, while many developing countries that were forced to hastily open up their markets and integrate failed. However, if implemented properly, globalization has proven that it can benefit all parties involved and that the potential gains outweigh the losses.

For individuals in very poor and economically unstable countries, globalization tends to do more harm than good. Through the economic, political and cultural examples stated above, globalization has not aided these countries climb out of poverty, develop an influential government or have a strong cultural identity, in fact, it has done the exact opposite. L’Huillier quotes Charles Darwin, “if the misery of our poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by out institution, great is our sin” (2017 381). The business model that globalization suggests is an unattainable utopia for those in developing countries. These traits of poverty and war have always existed yet, many of today’s countries are the way they are because of the models that are favored and paraded under globalization

Globalization is the process of integration arising from the interchange among people, ideas, and culture. Globalization shows that international trade between other countries has impacted the way the U.S is now. Most of the products we use today is made in other countries such as China, Indonesia, and South Korea. As beneficial it may sound to have products made cheap in other countries and sold in the United States at a much higher price. This is also known to have a problem to the factory workers.

Development and underdevelopment are linked and “condition each other mutually” resulting in a divided world that consists of industrial “central” countries and underdeveloped “peripheral” countries (Valenzuela and Valenzuela, 1978, p.544), with the periphery often being constrained by its role in the global capitalist system (Valenzuela and Valenzuela, 1978, p.544).

According to the World Bank, from 1993 to 1998, poverty rate has reduced by 14 percent in developing countries, similar to about 107 million people. This may result from receiving foreign investment that plays an important role in local economy growth. For example, the proportion of population living in poverty in India decreased by half in the two decades, from the 1970s to 1990s, while the number of Chinese in poverty declined by approximately 210 million during twenty-one years, from 1978 to 1999 (Healey 2008). In other words, the standard of living is improving due to the benefits of international economic activities.

In theory, globalization should help contribute to the equality of the global economy. Yet this is not the case in reality. Globalization contributes to unsustainable prosperity for a very small percentage of the world’s population. For those in developing countries, it is especially unsustainable. The resources in these areas are consumed at an unstable rate and the environment given very little consideration. The workers are treated as if they are expendable. The smaller economies of these countries are vastly taken advantage of. For these reasons, globalization contributes to sustainable prosperity to a small extent.

Globalization over the past twenty has become an issue in many countries. This industrialization of second and third world countries by Western Civilization creates many opportunities for the inhabitants. Not only does it expand trading markets, but also promotes productivity and efficiency; thus improving the country and integrating it into the industrial world. This process not only benefits third world counties, but also industrialized nations by allowing them to export goods to the developing world and increase their profit margin.

Within the last 60 years, Third World development has been a global priority, at the top of virtually every Western agenda. And with the rise of the global population and poverty levels continuing to rise along with it, it is very easy to see why human development is becoming such a topic of focus and discussion among members of the academia. But one question that everyone wants the answer too is, how does Third World development fit into Globalization? Despite apparent compatibility, when closely examined it is clear to see that Globalization actually contradicts Third World development due to the conflict of agendas. Both Globalization and Development hold views concerning market reform, social structure and regulation, which are

According to Richard N (2006), the free movement of goods due to free market or trade has led to globalization. Though the effects have been assumed to benefit all, there is a large inequality among the poor and the rich both within the countries among the nations. Capitalism is contributed to technological advancement, which has then influenced free trade. The uncontrolled globalization has resulted in more developed societies becoming rich. The rich economies are able to exploit the market by producing at lower price due to their level of technology and advancement in research. They are also able to protect their economy through export subsidies and production subsidies to their farmers. This translates to lower prices for their goods in the global market hence controlling it. The poor countries despite having comparative advantage in production of some commodities they also suffer from competitive advantage from the developed countries they are forced to sell their commodities at a lower price than their expected. They suffer a lot in global trade, which is mainly controlled by the wealthier nations. There are regulations, which restrict the flow of goods in the world market from poor societies. This makes

The purpose of this review is to investigate the claims made by economists on why poverty is a reoccurring factor in developing areas, and whether or not that particular claim is indeed one of the reasons that these areas suffer from poverty. Poverty traps are one of the prominent factors in the reasoning behind poverty in developing areas; however, there are also many other supporting factors that reinforce poverty. Shepherd (2007) believes there is a point of equilibrium in

Globalization is the proximate and multidimensional set of political, economic, social, and technological integration around the globe. The increasing interconnectedness among countries can be seen through the prism of globalization. Essentially, the lives of people living in distant cities like Bangalore and Silicon Valley are brought closer as a result of this phenomenon. Drivers of this adjacent include; the expansion of trade, technological exchange, labor movement and investments (Stearns 2017). The discourse of globalization encompasses several multidisciplinary themes. The paper, however, concentrates on the economic factors, “which, entails the closer economic integration of countries of the world through increased flow of goods, services, capital and even labor.” (Stiglitz 2007: 4). The paper focuses on economic globalization and elucidates whether the globalization has reduced poverty and inequality or had reproduced the reversed implications. Meanwhile, the paper reveals if the developing world has benefited from the set. This seems to be the central question that policymakers, development economists, and politicians have been grappling with for years. The paper is presented in three parts. Part one reflects on the historical context of the problem statement. The second part compiles literature and juxtaposes with cases to corroborate the globalization-poverty-inequality triangle. Finally, the conclusion represents the author’s viewpoint on the

There are many ways to look at and understand modern globalization. In general terms, globalization means that the world, as a whole, is leading to a more utopian society, meaning that the globe is become very interconnected and similarities are growing between different regions and cultures of the world. Globalization is a phenomenon that has been evolving since before 10,000 B.C. This constant evolution can cause many problems, but it can also solve many issues positively as well. Development of any country, however, seems to be a key issue when discussing globalization. Globalization and development present two different factors in the world today. Many countries are lacking in their own development while the world around them is becoming more developed and globalized. Globalization hinders development because with globalization, less developed countries depend on more developed countries to help them to sustainability and self-reliance.

The countries that have experienced high and rising levels of poverty are more often than not, the developing countries that have been marginalised from the process of globalization. Think of North Korea or many countries in Africa. Such countries have insufficient levels of international trade and investment -- not too much. Whether poor countries are poor because they do not trade enough or because poverty stricken countries are prevented from engaging in the global economy, less globalization is generally associated with less development. Ernesto Zedillo, the former president of Mexico seems to have understood the power of globalization when he said, "In every case where a poor nation has significantly overcome its poverty, this has been achieved while engaging in production for export markets and opening itself to the influx of foreign goods, investment and technology -- that is, by participating in globalization."

Globalization is the new notion that has come to rule the world since the nineties of the last century with the end of the cold war. The frontlines of the state with increased reliance on the market economy and renewed belief in the private capital and assets, a process of structural alteration encouraged by the studies and influences of the World Bank and other International organisations have started in many of countries. Also Globalisation has brought in new avenues to developing countries. Greater access to developed country markets and technology transfer hold out promise improved productivity and higher living standard.